Sue

Crikey! No sign of the heron, then?

I've had a hard copy leaflet (Ulverscroft Road).

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I agree with you about idling - I ask adults > (often responsible looking or, unbelievably, in > liveried vehicles) to stop idling of engines and I > get success about 60 percent of the time. So do I (or did, when I was out and about). I usually got a blank stare or an answer along the lines of oh FFS. I'd say my success rate was about 10% .....

Seabag Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Actually the Horniman Walrus is THE mascot of > Brexit > > A bloated, roughly sketched ?we meant it to be > like this? fcuk up of a blubber mound. 🤣🤣🤣

Sadly put me off Habitat when I found out the Argos connection. Snobby I know 🤣 Though I do think their designs have gone downhill. Could be my taste is just aeons in the past 🤣

JW Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I always forget Habitat after that closed so many > stores - thanks for recommending. > > And for the other suggestions too. ED peeps are > the best. Completely off topic, but Habitat are now owned by Argos 😮 ETA: I've just noticed this thread is two years old 🤣

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 🐘💩 If that's lion dung, does it actually work?! Oh, I took my glasses off and now see it's a tiny elephant 🐘🙂

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You can also wee on the compost heap whilst you > are at it! I think we have had this conversation > before Sue.... That's different! Male urine acts as a compost activator (female urine doesn't). To the best of my knowledge it doesn't deter cats! I have googled and have put some citrus peel nearby. I am going to try netting, however I don't want to do anything which the cat may get caught up in and hurt itself. I may have to resort to one of those ultrasonic things, but they are quite expensive :(

Hamletter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Anyone got ways which work to keep cats (a > > particular cat) out of my garden? > > > > Urine! Yes, it works because animals such as cats, > foxes etc etc are territorial and mark their > territory in the way they are accustomed. > > Mark your own territory (suggest after dark) in a > manner that is akin to that used by the animals. Hmmm, I'm not sure it's that easy! Surely I would need to use the urine of another cat?

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am waiting for a Parcel to be delivered.. > > It was dispatched at 07.00am 17th March Royal > Mail First Class Delivery... > > I have a tracking number but when I click on > TRACK it just says > 'An update will only be provided when we attempt > to deliver your item' > Don't think you'll have much luck there, Foxy. Three days is nothing. I waited thirty nine days for a bank card not long ago.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't remember getting such an email.. > > I delete emails which I consider I do not need to > read. > > Foxy It went to people in the clinically extremely vulnerable group, so if you are not in that group (which I don't think you can be as you have not been shielding) then you wouldn't have got it. But if you had been in that group, it would probably not have been a very good idea to delete it without reading it.

Anyone got ways which work to keep cats (a particular cat) out of my garden? Yesterday I rigged up an Emett (sp?) like contraption of string and canes at the corner it usually comes in, but I've just chased it out again. It sits and waits for birds and mice, and probably frogs as well 😡 It's been worse since I had to cut back a climbing rose in that corner 😭

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Private Eye is late for the first time in over a > month. Just got mine!

elloriac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just had a first class letter posted on 4 March > delivered. 2 weeks to travel 30 miles. It's not the travelling that takes two weeks. It's the time sitting in the "delivery" (not) office at Peckham :( Your letter probably arrived there the day after it was posted, and has been there every since (until today).

Lynne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It all seems to have slowed down/stopped again > after some attempts after Christmas to get the > deliveries moving again Yes, that's my impression as well. A couple of days ago, after ages with no post at all, I received a huge load of post including one item which I had had a refund for because it didn't arrive for weeks, and a Mother's Day card posted first class in good time to arrive - but was days late. As was a code I needed for a bank application (late but luckily not too late). Royal Mail do seem to give priority to some things - my medication from Echo has always arrived on time.

NewWave Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > sounds par for the course for this government so > far. My thoughts exactly .....

I found it very confusing. As in: you no longer need to shield, but don't do this, don't do that, get someone else to get your medication, avoid shops where possible, etc etc etc Shielding in all but name, so far as I can see.

Bony Fido Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Bic Basher Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Planetsally Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > The Foxton's site was the DSS office but was > by > > > then rebranded and called the "Benefits > Agency" > > > and there was an "Employment > > > Services"(Jobcentre)along where Haart estate > > > agents is. I'm sure there was a Woolwich > > building > > > society there as well at the time. > > > > > > Yes there was, Woolwich was acquired by > Barclays > > and they closed I think it was 08/09 with > Woolwich > > products now being sold at Barclays. > > > > William Hill and Haart were all part of Dulwich > > Jobcentre before they were turned into two > > separate retail outlets. > > That Woolwich branch was blooming purgatory for > customers - one day I timed how long it took to be > served - it was 35 minutes after entering before I > got my turn at the counter. The staff were so > slow, they would speak to the next customer and > then disappear for 10 or 15 minutes. There was a Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society too, I think where the new (ish) Olde Worlde sweetshop is now.

Lynne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A model/war > games shop near Emily's fish and chip shop. That was on Lordship Lane, wasn't it? It was a very strange shop!

Has anybody else in the clinically extremely vulnerable group received a very long email telling them that from 1 April (the date seems appropriate), they are no longer advised to shield, but going on at great length about all the extra precautions they are still advised to take? Can anyone else make sense of it? It seems to me that we are still advised to shield, but it is no longer called that, so some unfortunate people will have to return to work.

Thanks Penguin, but I didn't get it from a paper, it's apparently a medical news site for people working in the medical profession? And the article I posted appears to have been written by one of the researchers? He says "our study is ongoing"? He does stress that the study is not complete and that they were looking at a very specific group or people. Also the Zoe suggestion to take the vaccine was clearly made with very little research to back it up at the time (not that I'm in any way suggesting that immune suppressed people should not have the jab!) But - it's not the US publisher who has made any extrapolation, so far as I can see, it's a professor who was directly involved in the research. I may be wrong, but that's how I read it. ETA: Just read this post from someone on the forum I got the article I posted above from (grammar) (it's a forum for people with a particular auto-immune condition): "BETTER NEWS!I contacted Prof Segev for some clarity (the author of the article)He just replied and said that they don't have evidence that 'steroids are blunting the vaccine response' but results are preliminary."

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but I have just read this. I have put the bold font into the text. Although the research was with patients who had had organ transplants, it seems that the findings may also apply to people with auto-immune conditions: https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/vaccines/91631?xid=nl_mpt_DHE_2021-03-16&eun=g1781883d0r&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20Headlines%20Top%20Cat%20HeC%20%202021-03-16&utm_term=NL_Daily_DHE_dual-gmail-definition Taking care of a lot of immunosuppressed patients, one big question my Johns Hopkins colleagues and I have had throughout the pandemic has been: Will vaccines rescue them from the COVID-19 threat? Based on a new study we published today in JAMA, the answer appears to be: only for some. The day that the FDA granted the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine an emergency use authorization, we launched a national study of vaccine immune responses in immunosuppressed solid organ transplant recipients. Among 436 COVID-na?ve participants who received a first dose of mRNA vaccine, only 17% mounted detectable antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. This is in stark contrast to immunocompetent people who were vaccinated, of whom 100% mounted detectable antibody; that was true for people who had received either the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccine. We also found that those taking anti-metabolites, such as mycophenolate or azathioprine, were about five times less likely to develop antibody responses (8.75% detectable antibody in those taking anti-metabolites versus 41.4% in those not taking them). Naturally, we were disappointed to see these findings, as we were hoping to be able to tell our immunosuppressed patients that the vaccines seemed to work well for them. Given this observation, the CDC should update their new guidelines for vaccinated individuals to warn immunosuppressed people that they still may be susceptible to COVID-19 after vaccination. As the CDC guidelines are currently written, they assume that vaccination means immunity. Our study shows that this is unlikely for most transplant recipients, and one could guess that our findings (especially those concerning anti-metabolites) could also apply to other immunosuppressed patients, such as those with autoimmune conditions. Of note, our previous research has not found that immunosuppressed transplant patients are at increased risk of COVID-19 mortality as we thought might be the case. But regardless, the vaccine does not seem to work as well in this same population. As a transplant surgeon, there are a few implications for my patients. First, it seems pretty clear that immunosuppressed individuals need (at least) their second vaccine dose; proposals to stop at one dose until the rest of the population is vaccinated apply to immunocompetent people, but not to my patients. Second, it is critically important for immunosuppressed individuals to realize that they are not necessarily immune after receiving the vaccine, and to talk to their providers about antibody testing before relaxing protective behaviors. Fortunately, semiquantitative antibody tests like the ones used in our study are widely available, and correlate well with neutralizing immunity. Our study is ongoing, and soon we will have data from the second dose, as well as deeper studies of T-cell and B-cell responses, which can confer immunity even when antibodies are not present. We are also studying other vulnerable populations. Enrollment is open, we welcome new participants, and we hope to share more information soon. Dorry Segev, MD, PhD, is a professor of surgery and epidemiology and associate vice chair of surgery at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The pre-decimal > ha'penny dropped in 1970 would now be worth about > 8 pence. 8 pence? Not as much as that, surely? Anyway, never mind the ha'penny. I remember buying a ball of wool in Tyrells (sp?) in Streatham for sixpence three farthings 😂 It is very disconcerting when your childhood is history. If it had been Sharmans, a bit further up the road, my money would have gone whizzing up to the cashier on the floor above in one of those pneumatic tube things 😮

Done, thank you BNG

Are the cheeses in the vegan lasagne vegan? It isn't clear.